You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flink.apache.org by Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com> on 2023/07/20 09:22:46 UTC
[VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Hi all,
I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting thread
have been addressed.
Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the must-have
items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority) requires
another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating descriptions /
progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote.
The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the consensus
voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
Best,
Xintong
[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
[3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Jingsong Li <ji...@gmail.com>.
+1 binding
Thanks all for your work!
Best,
Jingsong
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 10:52 AM Jark Wu <im...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks Xintong for driving this. Thanks all for finalizing the
> SourceFunction conclusion.
>
> Best,
> Jark
>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 22:28, Alexander Fedulov <al...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding), assuming SourceFunction gets added back to the
> > doc as a "nice-to-have". I am glad we've reached a consensus here.
> > Extra thanks to Leonard for coordinating this discussion in particular.
> >
> > Best,
> > Alex
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 15:43, Jing Ge <ji...@ververica.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding), glad to see we are now on the same page. Thank you all.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Jing
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:18 PM Yun Tang <my...@live.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > > Yun Tang
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@flink.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
> > > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zhu
> > > >
> > > > Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
> > > > >
> > > > > +1(binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Leonard
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <
> > > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Xingtong,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted
> > with
> > > > > > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the clarification,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > > > > > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi Konstantin,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and
> > > part
> > > > of
> > > > > >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a
> > > > *nice-to-have*
> > > > > >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do
> > > > you have
> > > > > >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic
> > > > needs to
> > > > > >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to
> > > further
> > > > block
> > > > > >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release
> > 2.0
> > > > still
> > > > > >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and
> > update
> > > > the
> > > > > >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another
> > vote
> > > > if
> > > > > >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the
> > > must-have
> > > > list.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> WDYT?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Xintong
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [1]
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> > > > > >> [2]
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <
> > knaufk@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> > > > > >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed
> > > > from the
> > > > > >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> > > > > >> concluded.
> > > > > >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex
> > Fedulov
> > > > and
> > > > > >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> > > > > >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion
> > > > seems to
> > > > > >> go
> > > > > >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a
> > > > call
> > > > > >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <
> > carp84@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> +1 (binding)
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Best Regards,
> > > > > >>>> Yu
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> +1 (binding)
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the
> > efforts
> > > > in
> > > > > >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Best
> > > > > >>>>> Yuan
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <
> > > > tonysong820@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Hi all,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> > > > > >> items
> > > > > >>>> for
> > > > > >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2],
> > and
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> > > > > >> voting
> > > > > >>>>> thread
> > > > > >>>>>> have been addressed.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > > > > >>>> must-have
> > > > > >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the
> > priority)
> > > > > >>>> requires
> > > > > >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > > > > >>>> descriptions /
> > > > > >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> > > > > >> vote.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> > > > > >> consensus
> > > > > >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Best,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Xintong
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> [1]
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> [2]
> > > > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> [3]
> > > > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> > > > > >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > > > > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Jark Wu <im...@gmail.com>.
+1 (binding)
Thanks Xintong for driving this. Thanks all for finalizing the
SourceFunction conclusion.
Best,
Jark
On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 22:28, Alexander Fedulov <al...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding), assuming SourceFunction gets added back to the
> doc as a "nice-to-have". I am glad we've reached a consensus here.
> Extra thanks to Leonard for coordinating this discussion in particular.
>
> Best,
> Alex
>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 15:43, Jing Ge <ji...@ververica.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding), glad to see we are now on the same page. Thank you all.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jing
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:18 PM Yun Tang <my...@live.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Yun Tang
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@flink.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Zhu
> > >
> > > Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
> > > >
> > > > Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
> > > >
> > > > +1(binding)
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > > > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <
> > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Xingtong,
> > > > >
> > > > > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted
> with
> > > > > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the clarification,
> > > > >
> > > > > Konstantin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > > > > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi Konstantin,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and
> > part
> > > of
> > > > >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a
> > > *nice-to-have*
> > > > >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do
> > > you have
> > > > >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic
> > > needs to
> > > > >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to
> > further
> > > block
> > > > >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release
> 2.0
> > > still
> > > > >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and
> update
> > > the
> > > > >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another
> vote
> > > if
> > > > >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the
> > must-have
> > > list.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> WDYT?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Best,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Xintong
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [1]
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> > > > >> [2]
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <
> knaufk@apache.org
> > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> > > > >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed
> > > from the
> > > > >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> > > > >> concluded.
> > > > >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex
> Fedulov
> > > and
> > > > >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> > > > >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion
> > > seems to
> > > > >> go
> > > > >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a
> > > call
> > > > >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <
> carp84@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> +1 (binding)
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Best Regards,
> > > > >>>> Yu
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1 (binding)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the
> efforts
> > > in
> > > > >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Best
> > > > >>>>> Yuan
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <
> > > tonysong820@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Hi all,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> > > > >> items
> > > > >>>> for
> > > > >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2],
> and
> > > > >> the
> > > > >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> > > > >> voting
> > > > >>>>> thread
> > > > >>>>>> have been addressed.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > > > >>>> must-have
> > > > >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the
> priority)
> > > > >>>> requires
> > > > >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > > > >>>> descriptions /
> > > > >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> > > > >> vote.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> > > > >> consensus
> > > > >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Best,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Xintong
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> [1]
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> [2]
> > > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> [3]
> > > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> > > > >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > > > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Alexander Fedulov <al...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non-binding), assuming SourceFunction gets added back to the
doc as a "nice-to-have". I am glad we've reached a consensus here.
Extra thanks to Leonard for coordinating this discussion in particular.
Best,
Alex
On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 15:43, Jing Ge <ji...@ververica.com.invalid> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding), glad to see we are now on the same page. Thank you all.
>
> Best regards,
> Jing
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:18 PM Yun Tang <my...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
> >
> >
> > Best
> > Yun Tang
> > ________________________________
> > From: Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> > To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@flink.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zhu
> >
> > Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
> > >
> > > Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
> > >
> > > +1(binding)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Leonard
> > >
> > > > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <
> > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Xingtong,
> > > >
> > > > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> > > > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the clarification,
> > > >
> > > > Konstantin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > > > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Konstantin,
> > > >>
> > > >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and
> part
> > of
> > > >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a
> > *nice-to-have*
> > > >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do
> > you have
> > > >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> > > >>
> > > >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic
> > needs to
> > > >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to
> further
> > block
> > > >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0
> > still
> > > >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update
> > the
> > > >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote
> > if
> > > >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the
> must-have
> > list.
> > > >>
> > > >> WDYT?
> > > >>
> > > >> Best,
> > > >>
> > > >> Xintong
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> > > >> [2]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <knaufk@apache.org
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> > > >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed
> > from the
> > > >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> > > >> concluded.
> > > >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov
> > and
> > > >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> > > >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion
> > seems to
> > > >> go
> > > >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a
> > call
> > > >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <carp84@gmail.com
> >:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> +1 (binding)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Best Regards,
> > > >>>> Yu
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> +1 (binding)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts
> > in
> > > >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Best
> > > >>>>> Yuan
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <
> > tonysong820@gmail.com>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Hi all,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> > > >> items
> > > >>>> for
> > > >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
> > > >> the
> > > >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> > > >> voting
> > > >>>>> thread
> > > >>>>>> have been addressed.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > > >>>> must-have
> > > >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> > > >>>> requires
> > > >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > > >>>> descriptions /
> > > >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> > > >> vote.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> > > >> consensus
> > > >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Best,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Xintong
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> [2]
> > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> [3]
> > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> > > >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Jing Ge <ji...@ververica.com.INVALID>.
+1 (non-binding), glad to see we are now on the same page. Thank you all.
Best regards,
Jing
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:18 PM Yun Tang <my...@live.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
>
>
> Best
> Yun Tang
> ________________________________
> From: Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
> To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@flink.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Zhu
>
> Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
> >
> > Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
> >
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Leonard
> >
> > > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <
> knauf.konstantin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Xingtong,
> > >
> > > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> > > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the clarification,
> > >
> > > Konstantin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > >> Hi Konstantin,
> > >>
> > >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part
> of
> > >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a
> *nice-to-have*
> > >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do
> you have
> > >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> > >>
> > >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic
> needs to
> > >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further
> block
> > >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0
> still
> > >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update
> the
> > >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote
> if
> > >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have
> list.
> > >>
> > >> WDYT?
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >>
> > >> Xintong
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> > >> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> > >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed
> from the
> > >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> > >> concluded.
> > >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov
> and
> > >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> > >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion
> seems to
> > >> go
> > >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a
> call
> > >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> > >>>
> > >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1 (binding)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Best Regards,
> > >>>> Yu
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> +1 (binding)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts
> in
> > >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Best
> > >>>>> Yuan
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <
> tonysong820@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi all,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> > >> items
> > >>>> for
> > >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> > >> voting
> > >>>>> thread
> > >>>>>> have been addressed.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > >>>> must-have
> > >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> > >>>> requires
> > >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > >>>> descriptions /
> > >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> > >> vote.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> > >> consensus
> > >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Best,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Xintong
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [2]
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [3]
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> > >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Yun Tang <my...@live.com>.
+1 (non-binding), thanks @xintong for driving this work.
Best
Yun Tang
________________________________
From: Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 16:35
To: dev@flink.apache.org <de...@flink.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Zhu
Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
>
> Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Best,
> Leonard
>
> > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <kn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Xingtong,
> >
> > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification,
> >
> > Konstantin
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Hi Konstantin,
> >>
> >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
> >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
> >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
> >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> >>
> >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic needs to
> >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further block
> >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0 still
> >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update the
> >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote if
> >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have list.
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Xintong
> >>
> >>
> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> >> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
> >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> >> concluded.
> >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
> >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to
> >> go
> >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
> >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> >>>
> >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> >>>>
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> Yu
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best
> >>>>> Yuan
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> >> items
> >>>> for
> >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
> >> the
> >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> >> voting
> >>>>> thread
> >>>>>> have been addressed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> >>>> must-have
> >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> >>>> requires
> >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> >>>> descriptions /
> >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> >> vote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> >> consensus
> >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Xintong
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [2]
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [3]
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Zhu Zhu <re...@gmail.com>.
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Zhu
Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com> 于2023年7月26日周三 15:40写道：
>
> Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Best,
> Leonard
>
> > On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <kn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Xingtong,
> >
> > yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> > Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification,
> >
> > Konstantin
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> > tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Hi Konstantin,
> >>
> >> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
> >> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
> >> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
> >> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
> >>
> >> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic needs to
> >> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further block
> >> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0 still
> >> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update the
> >> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote if
> >> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have list.
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Xintong
> >>
> >>
> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> >> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> >>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
> >>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> >> concluded.
> >>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
> >>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> >>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to
> >> go
> >>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
> >>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> >>>
> >>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> >>>>
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> Yu
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> >>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best
> >>>>> Yuan
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> >> items
> >>>> for
> >>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
> >> the
> >>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> >> voting
> >>>>> thread
> >>>>>> have been addressed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> >>>> must-have
> >>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> >>>> requires
> >>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> >>>> descriptions /
> >>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> >> vote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> >> consensus
> >>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Xintong
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [2]
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [3]
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> >>> https://github.com/knaufk
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Konstantin Knauf*
> > knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Leonard Xu <xb...@gmail.com>.
Thanks @xingtong for driving the work.
+1(binding)
Best,
Leonard
> On Jul 26, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Konstantin Knauf <kn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Xingtong,
>
> yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
> Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
>
> Thanks for the clarification,
>
> Konstantin
>
>
>
> Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
> tonysong820@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Konstantin,
>>
>> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
>> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
>> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
>> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
>>
>> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic needs to
>> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further block
>> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0 still
>> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update the
>> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote if
>> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have list.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Xintong
>>
>>
>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
>>> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
>>> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
>> concluded.
>>> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
>>> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
>>> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to
>> go
>>> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
>>> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
>>>
>>> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Yu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
>>>>> resolving the complexities :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Yuan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
>> items
>>>> for
>>>>>> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
>> the
>>>>>> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
>> voting
>>>>> thread
>>>>>> have been addressed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
>>>> must-have
>>>>>> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
>>>> requires
>>>>>> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
>>>> descriptions /
>>>>>> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
>> vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
>> consensus
>>>>>> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Xintong
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> https://twitter.com/snntrable
>>> https://github.com/knaufk
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Konstantin Knauf*
> knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Konstantin Knauf <kn...@gmail.com>.
Hi Xingtong,
yes, I am fine with the conclusion for SourceFunction. I chatted with
Leonard a bit last night. Let's continue this vote.
Thanks for the clarification,
Konstantin
Am Mi., 26. Juli 2023 um 04:03 Uhr schrieb Xintong Song <
tonysong820@gmail.com>:
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
> the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
> item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
> different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
>
> If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic needs to
> be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further block
> this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0 still
> has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update the
> list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote if
> later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have list.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Best,
>
> Xintong
>
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> > SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
> > table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has
> concluded.
> > There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
> > Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> > deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to
> go
> > in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
> > about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
> >
> > Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Yu
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> > > > resolving the complexities :-)
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > > Yuan
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work
> items
> > > for
> > > > > release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and
> the
> > > > > previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous
> voting
> > > > thread
> > > > > have been addressed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > > must-have
> > > > > items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> > > requires
> > > > > another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > > descriptions /
> > > > > progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another
> vote.
> > > > >
> > > > > The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the
> consensus
> > > > > voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > Xintong
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > > > >
> > > > > [2]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > > > >
> > > > > [3]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > https://twitter.com/snntrable
> > https://github.com/knaufk
> >
>
--
*Konstantin Knauf*
knauf.konstantin@gmail.com
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>.
Hi Konstantin,
It seems the offline discussion has already taken place [1], and part of
the outcome is that removal of SourceFunction would be a *nice-to-have*
item for release 2.0 which may not block this *must-have* vote. Do you have
different opinions about the conclusions in [1]?
If there are still concerns, and the discussion around this topic needs to
be continued, then I'd suggest (as I mentioned in [2]) not to further block
this vote (i.e. the decision on other must-have items). Release 2.0 still
has a long way to go, and it is likely we need to review and update the
list every once in a while. We can update the list with another vote if
later we decide to add the removal of SourceFunction to the must-have list.
WDYT?
Best,
Xintong
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yyw52k45x2sp1jszldtdx7hc98n72w7k
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j5d5022ky8k5t088ffm03727o5g9x9jr
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org> wrote:
> I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
> SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
> table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has concluded.
> There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
> Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
> deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to go
> in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
> about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
>
> Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Yu
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> > > resolving the complexities :-)
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Yuan
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items
> > for
> > > > release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
> > > > previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting
> > > thread
> > > > have been addressed.
> > > >
> > > > Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> > must-have
> > > > items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> > requires
> > > > another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> > descriptions /
> > > > progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote.
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the consensus
> > > > voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Xintong
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > > >
> > > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > > >
> > > > [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> https://twitter.com/snntrable
> https://github.com/knaufk
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Konstantin Knauf <kn...@apache.org>.
I assume this vote includes a decision to not removing
SourceFunction/SinkFunction in Flink 2.0 (as it has been removed from the
table). If this is the case, I don't think, this discussion has concluded.
There are multiple contributors like myself, Martijn, Alex Fedulov and
Maximilian Michels, who have indicated they would be in favor of
deprecating/dropping them. This Source/Sink Function discussion seems to go
in circles in general. I am wondering if it makes sense to have a call
about this instead of repeating mailing list discussions.
Am Di., 25. Juli 2023 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
>
> Best Regards,
> Yu
>
>
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> > resolving the complexities :-)
> >
> > Best
> > Yuan
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items
> for
> > > release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
> > > previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting
> > thread
> > > have been addressed.
> > >
> > > Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the
> must-have
> > > items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority)
> requires
> > > another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating
> descriptions /
> > > progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote.
> > >
> > > The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the consensus
> > > voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Xintong
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> > >
> > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> > >
> > > [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> > >
> >
>
--
https://twitter.com/snntrable
https://github.com/knaufk
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Yu Li <ca...@gmail.com>.
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving this, Xintong!
Best Regards,
Yu
On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 18:28, Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> resolving the complexities :-)
>
> Best
> Yuan
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
> > release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
> > previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting
> thread
> > have been addressed.
> >
> > Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the must-have
> > items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority) requires
> > another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating descriptions /
> > progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote.
> >
> > The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the consensus
> > voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Xintong
> >
> >
> > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
> >
> > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
> >
> > [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Release 2.0 must-have work items - Round 2
Posted by Yuan Mei <yu...@gmail.com>.
+1 (binding)
Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
resolving the complexities :-)
Best
Yuan
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:23 PM Xintong Song <to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start another round of VOTE for the must-have work items for
> release 2.0 [1]. The corresponding discussion thread is [2], and the
> previous voting thread is [3]. All comments from the previous voting thread
> have been addressed.
>
> Please note that once the vote is approved, any changes to the must-have
> items (adding / removing must-have items, changing the priority) requires
> another vote. Assigning contributors / reviewers, updating descriptions /
> progress, changes to nice-to-have items do not require another vote.
>
> The vote will be open until at least July 25, following the consensus
> voting process. Votes of PMC members are binding.
>
> Best,
>
> Xintong
>
>
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/2.0+Release
>
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/l3dkdypyrovd3txzodn07lgdwtwvhgk4
>
> [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/r0y9syc6k5nmcxvnd0hj33htdpdj9k6m
>